Please note: we have been online over ten years, and we want The Trek BBS to continue as a free site. But if you block our ads we are at risk.Please consider unblocking ads for this site - every ad you view counts and helps us pay for the bandwidth that you are using. Thank you for your understanding.

Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

Jonesy wrote:

The Overlord wrote:

Except DS9 is most like a modern TV show then the other Trek shows. Really most of the good TV shows on cable focus on characterization and ongoing plots.

A new Star Trek show will have to be a show of this era, not try to be a show from the 60s or 80s.

I think DS9 is way more politically and socially relevant now then when it was introduced.

Why do you think that?

__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

The Overlord wrote:

A new Star Trek show will need a stronger focus on characterization, it can't have bland one note characters like Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather who add nothing to the show. If a character is on show they should serve a real purpose and be important and compelling.

I'm afraid modern free-to-air TV isn't trending towards the inclusion of "important and compelling" characters. The ubiquitous "Law and Order", "CSI" and "NCIS" shows seem to be populated with a large cast of cyphers who can be, and are, quite interchangeable. When discussing episodes over the watercooler, I find myself saying, "that woman who has a secret past", "the grey haired boss", or the "geeky computer girl", to identify the characters. Something that never happened to me with ST TV series of the past.

The other big cleverness aspect of those shows is a move towards segments that resemble a music video. Special effects that take us unto the human body, replay a theory for a murder scene, or show the wacky science fictiony ease of enhancing CCTV footage on holographic screens to gather evidence and leads.

When such shows going into endless repeat, it becomes a bizarre experience seeing the revolving door of actors saying the lines.

Also, those (many) episodes that end in a cliffhanger! It may have worked in first-run primetime, but catching Part 2 of a show that can pop up in a new timeslot every week is becoming impossible - and must be even worse in the US where you've always had so many channels.

Even worse: the programmers Down Under are typically pairing one new episode (be it "Law and Order", "CSI" or "NCIS") with one "classic" episode of the same title in telemovie-sized chunks. Up comes "To be continued", and after the commercial break, you're jumping back in history by several years, with many different castmembers seemingly, suddenly, stepping back in roles.

And you thought the time jumps in "Lost" were confusing? At least they were scripted jumps!

Re: A New Star Trek Show Will Need a Stronger Focus on Characterizatio

Therin of Andor wrote:

The Overlord wrote:

A new Star Trek show will need a stronger focus on characterization, it can't have bland one note characters like Harry Kim or Travis Mayweather who add nothing to the show. If a character is on show they should serve a real purpose and be important and compelling.

I'm afraid modern free-to-air TV isn't trending towards the inclusion of "important and compelling" characters. The ubiquitous "Law and Order", "CSI" and "NCIS" shows seem to be populated with a large cast of cyphers who can be, and are, quite interchangeable. When discussing episodes over the watercooler, I find myself saying, "that woman who has a secret past", "the grey haired boss", or the "geeky computer girl", to identify the characters. Something that never happened to me with ST TV series of the past.

The other big cleverness aspect of those shows is a move towards segments that resemble a music video. Special effects that take us unto the human body, replay a theory for a murder scene, or show the wacky science fictiony ease of enhancing CCTV footage on holographic screens to gather evidence and leads.

When such shows going into endless repeat, it becomes a bizarre experience seeing the revolving door of actors saying the lines.

Also, those (many) episodes that end in a cliffhanger! It may have worked in first-run primetime, but catching Part 2 of a show that can pop up in a new timeslot every week is becoming impossible - and must be even worse in the US where you've always had so many channels.

Even worse: the programmers Down Under are typically pairing one new episode (be it "Law and Order", "CSI" or "NCIS") with one "classic" episode of the same title in telemovie-sized chunks. Up comes "To be continued", and after the commercial break, you're jumping back in history by several years, with many different castmembers seemingly, suddenly, stepping back in roles.

And you thought the time jumps in "Lost" were confusing? At least they were scripted jumps!

That's why everyone says all the good TV is on cable, with shows that have characters with defined personalities and great ongoing stories.

Breaking Bad and Game of thrones are better rearguard then CSI and Law and Order, because the former has better plots and characterization then the later.